Final Solution? Infant Circumcision Outlawed In Germany!

Headlined, “The Crime of Circumcision,” it deals with a ruling issued by a judge in Germany that prohibits Jews from circumcizing their baby boys:

A district judge in Cologne, Germany, recently ruled that ritual circumcision is a crime, violating “the fundamental right of the child to bodily integrity,” which outweighs other parental and religious rights. “This change runs counter to the interests of the child,” the court concluded, “who can decide his religious affiliation himself later in life.”

Circumcision is a rite central to the Jewish faith and is, in fact, the rite by which a male becomes part of the Jewish community.

The circumcision of infants is also expressly commanded by Jewish law, which requires the circumcision of baby boys on the eighth day after birth.

Unsurprisingly, the decision is being condemened by religious folks:

German religious figures from all the Abrahamic faiths criticized the Cologne ruling, with particular outrage expressed by Jewish leaders. ­Dieter Graumann, head of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, called it “outrageous and insensitive” and warned that a general application of the decision would “coldbloodedly force Judaism into illegality.”

These days the State assumes power for everything. When the Jewish religion prescribes circumcision for infants and when it has been their custom for thousands of years, who is this Govt. to undo that ? Then where is the religious freedom ? We can understand if any parent objected to the custom and they were forced to do it. If tomorrow the Govt says that for mass wine should not be used and only water , ? Let the Govt , that is the representatives of the people understand the limitations.

Believe it or not, this is a trend to limit ritual religious activities in the Islamic emigre communities by directing that legislation at the parctices of the next most similar religion. This is owing to the fact that the EU has effectively implemented the OIC’s Ten-Year Programme of Action that make any unauthorized discussions relating to Islam a crime. Think I a joking? The US State Department played the lead role in getting that initiave to pass under UN Resolution 16/18 back in December 2011. I do belive that some West Coast city (San Francisco maybe) tried to pass a similar ban on circumcision.

Also, of a similar note but running in a different direction, a US military serviceman converted to a form of Baptism in which he deemed his service raised issues of conscientious objection in which he was awarded a discharge. His claims were so far beyond any latitude given previously that it became truly noteworthy. This is believed to be in response to the Fort Hood killer’s (Major Hasan) demands to be released under a new standard of conscientious objector status as briefed before he stuck. His demand was based on Islamic legal requirements. Now, when such requests of conscientius objector status are raised, it will be based on precedent set by a seemingly dissimilar case. This whole activity comes under the title “lawfare.”

Finally, and maybe most importantly, if you read the language of the German Court in this article, it clearly seems to derive its langauge from UN movements on the “Rights of the Child” that would have the effect of making child rearing an international legal issue in exactly the way stated in the article. While a title with “Rights of the Child” seems all nice and gooey, you should take some time to see how wrong it is—that it effectively makes a parents choices in childrearing an issue of international law. Sounds out there? Its just one of the treaties this current administration is seeking to pass through UN treaty.

It will also be a basis for future attackes on the Chruch. The Kutlure Kampf should be studied as a serious pursuit. It seems to be the template — subordinating the “free exercise of religion” with permission to participate in a belief.